The Colorado Pro Life Alliance is promoting a ballot initiative called "the Woman's Right to Know". They claim such a law has been "protecting women" in other states. Just what is it that they think a woman has a right to know-the Alliance's views on abortion? And what are they protecting women from-a woman's right to make her own choice about whether or not to terminate a pregnancy?

This paternalistic initiative would require a woman to talk to a doctor, hear him or her read a prescribed commentary on abortion and wait at least 24 hours before having the procedure. The assumption must be that women don't put great thought into this very difficult decision, that women need some "big brother" to tell them what to think and what to do. Women don't undertake abortion lightly. They make that choice after agonizing thought about their own physical, emotional and financial abilities to bear and care for a baby. They seek out those they feel can best help them make their difficult decision-family, friends, medical personnel, religious advisers. They do not need to have the Colorado Pro Life Alliance dictate to them who should advise them or what they need to know. Women are not fluffy-headed creatures who need "big brother" to take them by the hand and tell them how to live their lives or make their decisions. This patronizing initiative would do just that. Further, it would have some government official determine what a doctor must read to a woman about a very private and personal medical decision.

If the Pro Life Alliance really wants to curb abortions, why don't they work to prevent unwanted pregnancies? For example, family planning services are a proven preventative to unplanned pregnancy. The Alliance could join the fight to have contraceptives covered by all health plans. Surely, they would agree that if Viagra is covered by health insurance, contraceptives should be as well. Generally in health care, preventing health problems is far superior to treating them later. Give women family planning help when they don't want to become pregnant and the demand for abortions will plummet.

Or, they could do what a neighbor of mine did. She is adamantly against abortion and frequently counsels young women on their options. (These women aren't forced to talk to her; they choose to seek her help in making their decisions about whether to have an abortion.) One desperate young woman my neighbor counseled was pregnant with twins. She had no job; the father was unable to support her or the babies after they were born. My neighbor offered to help take care of the babies if the woman would choose birth over abortion. The pregnant woman decided to have her babies and my neighbor was as good as her word. For an entire year, while the young mother was going to school and getting a job, the twins lived with my neighbor. Now that they are older, they spend frequent week-ends with her when their mom needs a break. She is a surrogate grandmother. I have tremendous respect for my neighbor and her beliefs. I cannot say the same for those who simply want to impose their views and values on women, curtail their options and then let them and their unwanted children struggle to survive alone.

It's pretty clear that "the Woman's Right to Know" initiative is not meant to help a woman make a tough decision. It is designed to be a significant roadblock to a woman who has already made her choice about terminating an unwanted pregnancy. It is designed to add significant costs to abortion providers and to make it even more difficult for a woman to exercise her right to have an abortion. This initiative is not about providing women with clear and unbiased information. It is, instead, about imposing one groups' agenda on others. It is about undermining women's personal privacy and denying them their right to make their own decisions based on their own thoughtful appraisal of their needs and circumstances. If it makes the ballot, Coloradans should just vote no.